photo-realistic rendering and our opinions

[jvd]

With the next gen of consoles coming out and an image quality increase most likely as big as the jump from the ps1- the ps2 I was wondering what everyones view on what you think is life like .

Not what we think the next gen consoles will be capable of but what we all feel will look very close to reality .

 

[V3]

Something that don't look CG, I guess, but that's too much to ask IMO. So something like LoTR.

Though I would rather for the objects to move, deform or break, realistically rather than it looks photoreal and stays static or have those stupid rag doll or the stupid physics that's currently implemented in most games I played.

 

[Guden Oden]

V3,

What's so stupid about 'ragdoll' physics? Half-Life 2 is a game where physics permeates everything, materials even have boyancy in water. About the only thing not simulated is fluid dynamics, if you have a tank of water and puncture it, it won't leak. That would be a bit too much to ask of today's CPUs though, so I don't blame Valve for skimping on this detail.

People can make a level with the editor where everything can break apart and be destroyed, cars, buildings, furniture... The pieces will scatter and fly about according to newtonian physics.

Is that REALLY "stupid", you think? Why?

 

[_phil_]

I (serioulsy ) don't worry for next-gen graphics.Nor i care really.
Like V3 i think next gen should be cpu side: Heavy on physics ,procedural comportemental,dynamics and interactivity .
Videogame is not really comparable to Cg movies as a media,and should explore more toward total freedom and interactivity than trying to copy apparences of reality .
Simply told ,i 'd rather have only 3-4 times the actual graphic power and 20-25 times the CPU power than the contrary.

 

[McFly]

I hope for an online world completly based on proedural formulas, where only position of buildings, special objects and players are variable, the rest is all based on the formulas. In that world everything should be possible, like racing (in the air, ground, water, snowboarding, ... whatever) The world should be very artistic, but the physics should be like here. Just imagine you could explore this huge (equal to our earth) world ... search for great mountains to snowboard or even to organize a snowboard event on that mountain ... it would be amazing!

In a game like that, most of the CPU power would be needed for the physics and fractal formula calculations, the regular 3D objects would only make up for small amount of needed processing power.

Fredi

 

[V3]

What's so stupid about 'ragdoll' physics?

For one, it doesn't convey any feeling of pain what so ever to the players. If you blow a game character arm off, they would fall and be in shock.

Realistic potrayals of what happend afterward on behavioural level is as important as rendering realistic skin or realistic human innards.

Half-Life 2 is a game where physics permeates everything, materials even have boyancy in water. About the only thing not simulated is fluid dynamics, if you have a tank of water and puncture it, it won't leak. That would be a bit too much to ask of today's CPUs though, so I don't blame Valve for skimping on this detail.

People can make a level with the editor where everything can break apart and be destroyed, cars, buildings, furniture... The pieces will scatter and fly about according to newtonian physics.

Is that REALLY "stupid", you think? Why?

You're talking about Half-Life 2 ? I haven't play Half-Life 2.

Well, if the HL2 editor can make a city with lots of skyscrapers and have Godzilla, demolishs the building realistically, than that would be good. The players can smash or rip chunks out of skyscrappers, and you'll see glass, furnitures, concretes or even people, all flying off, some still in chunks other smaller pieces, all falling realistically and still interact with your monster avatar even while falling, or when the top part of the skyscraper toppled and crash into the nearby building, causing realistic damage using our law of physics. Not too mentioned water main breaking apart, spurting out water every where, gas line broken creating explosion and fire.

In the end when Godzilla leave the player can examine the damage skyscrapers, you would be able to see the skeleton of the building, and innard of the building, etc. Take pictures and see who have the meanest looking damage

Or even simpler yet, children are swimming in one of those pool fills with thousands plastic balls. Imagine a game having a fight scene in one of those.

 

[StefanS]

I hope for an online world completly based on proedural formulas, where only position of buildings, special objects and players are variable, the rest is all based on the formulas. In that world everything should be possible, like racing (in the air, ground, water, snowboarding, ... whatever) The world should be very artistic, but the physics should be like here. Just imagine you could explore this huge (equal to our earth) world ... search for great mountains to snowboard or even to organize a snowboard event on that mountain ... it would be amazing!

How about going outside?

 

[McFly]

How about going outside?

It would be cheaper to just buy the game to do all that stuff. Just think about renting a helicopter to be able to snowboard mountain peak XY ... a virtual world would make things possible you could never afford in reality. Not to mention all the other things you can only have ion a virtual world, like being a totally different character or living in a completly different world.

Fredi

 

[Sonic]

I really don't think we are anywhere close to photorealistic graphics. Final Fantasy the movie wasn't even that close for me, at first I was wowed by the graphics but it doesn't come close to reality. But it does come a lot closer than most!

I think the one thing holding back graphics the most in a sense of realism is animation, physics, and geometry. Current animation levels clearly stink and it's not being helped with many games having a variable framerate and slowdown. I really hope next gen that games are at a constant and stable 60 fps or at least 30. Physics can clearly help animation in how things are supposed to move and react to what happens in the environment.

Next gen consoles should be able to push a lot more geometry to support more detailed and realistic objects in the environments; whether it be trees, buildings, etc. Moving objects should also become more prominent in that enemy creatures have a level of geometry that's comparable to today's main protagonists in games. There should be a lot more background stuff going on also in any type of wide open environment.

Physics needn't be realistic as that would beat the purpose of some games. In some games it is preferred, but in a platformer or some other time I would really like to have some wacky physics not found in real life.

 

[cthellis42]

What's so stupid about 'ragdoll' physics?

For one, it doesn't convey any feeling of pain what so ever to the players. If you blow a game character arm off, they would fall and be in shock.

Realistic potrayals of what happend afterward on behavioural level is as important as rendering realistic skin or realistic human innards.

That would rather be AI response though, wouldn't it? Obviously physics in and of itself is not able to convey a situation fully, but the process by which we ARE getting more realistic physics is still good.

 

[Squeak]

If the speculation that PS3 is going to use Renderman like rendering, turns out to be true, the biggest leap in graphics from this gen. is going to be procedural and explicit displacement mapping.
No longer will surfaces look artificial or painted on. There is going to be actual parallax movement when you change your view point.
That, I think is going to be the most noticeable change in nextgen graphics, real surfaces.

 

[pcostabel]

Personally, I hate the CG "photorealistic" look. Apart from a few exceptions (Gran Turismo, flight simulators), photorealism does not belong in games. If you want photoreal, go watch a movie. Games are supposed to immerse you in a fantasy world, and the art style should reflect that. A game like Zelda would be so much worse if Link looked like a real kid in a green costume. Even GTA would not benefit from realism: killing hookers in a cartoony world might be fun, but if they looked like real people, it would make me vomit.
Hopefully, the next gen will be powerful enough that photorealism will start showing its limits and push developers to explore different roads to distinguish themselves from the crowd.

 

[Wunderchu]

With the next gen of consoles coming out and an image quality increase most likely as big as the jump from the ps1- the ps2 I was wondering what everyones view on what you think is life like .

Not what we think the next gen consoles will be capable of but what we all feel will look very close to reality .

IMO Gollum in ROTK is the most realistic CG character ever created, and when consoles can render characters that have the level of detail that Gollum in ROTK has, then I will be quite satified 8) . (I don't think that the upcoming next-gen. consoles will be capable of rendering characters of that level of detail, but I believe the next-next-gen. (i.e.: 2011) consoles will be).

Personally, I hate the CG "photorealistic" look. Apart from a few exceptions (Gran Turismo, flight simulators), photorealism does not belong in games. If you want photoreal, go watch a movie. Games are supposed to immerse you in a fantasy world, and the art style should reflect that. A game like Zelda would be so much worse if Link looked like a real kid in a green costume. Even GTA would not benefit from realism: killing hookers in a cartoony world might be fun, but if they looked like real people, it would make me vomit.
Hopefully, the next gen will be powerful enough that photorealism will start showing its limits and push developers to explore different roads to distinguish themselves from the crowd.

certain types of games are more suited to photorealism than others, [i.e.: sports games, sim. games (as you mentioned)]

I also think that survival horror type games will benefit greatly from photorealism

 

[cthellis42]

"Photorealism" does not preclude being fantastical or imaginative, in simply refers to being more believable as what it is supposed to be, whether that is a soldier, knight, or Bugblatter Beast of Traal. In some games, the closer you get to realism works well, but even in others, attention do detail, higher quality models, and realistic traits will still make them more impressive--in that style.

Getting closer to one thing does not bring us further away from another--it widens the scope of what can more easily be accomplished.

 

[PC-Engine]

If you had a little toy figure that was sitting on your desk suddenly become "alive" would that be considered photoreal or fantasy???

 

[malcolm]

Photoreal doesnt mean you need to have things that exist here.
You might as well create real possible dna for the fish of finding nemo that makes them look as good(colorfull) as possible and render them in real physics.
Also who sais that dna that enables a human mind and speech in a fish isnt possible... simulation includes what could exist, not only the things we happen to have, maybe a talking fish wont evolve naturaly but im sure its possible dna.
So any fantasy world can be rendered photoreal, it are just different materials in a different world, even different physics can be simulated, why would it have to be the exact physics we have here.

 

[Wunderchu]

as a result of your posts, my understanding / conceptualization of the word "photorealism" has changed .. , thanks ppl

 

[Ug Lee]

I really hope next gen that games are at a constant and stable 60 fps or at least 30.

Gawd if there are games running at 30fps on the next gen machines then I'm going to be pretty damn depressed.

My hopes for next gen 'photorealism' - improved basic stuff. Better lighting, shadows, shading, geometry levels (real surfaces, and more of them) etc.

All at 60fps.

 

[London Geezer]

I really hope next gen that games are at a constant and stable 60 fps or at least 30.

Gawd if there are games running at 30fps on the next gen machines then I'm going to be pretty damn depressed.

My hopes for next gen 'photorealism' - improved basic stuff. Better lighting, shadows, shading, geometry levels (real surfaces, and more of them) etc.

All at 60fps.

As we've already seen this generation (the hardware being powerful enough to sustain 60fps at any time, still being able to produce decent graphics), some developers prefere having loads of pretty shiny effects at the expense of framerate, and it's not going to stop in the next generation, however powerful the hardware will be. Developers will find ways to hinder the framerate, all to make screenshots look prettier. You know, after all internet screenshots are more important than the game itself...

 

[V3]

That would rather be AI response though, wouldn't it? Obviously physics in and of itself is not able to convey a situation fully, but the process by which we ARE getting more realistic physics is still good.

That's why I called it 'stupid' ragdoll When everything looks photo real, it becomes easier to ruin the illussion by having stupid behavior.

Ragdoll has its place, for example in car accidents, head on collision, if seat belt not on, the passenger may be thrown out through the windscreen, or when your avatar is thrown by catapult, etc.